Table 9.
Volunteers’ appetite mean ratings (change from baseline) of cupcakes in the main study; overall and by age and unstimulated saliva flow rate.
| Overall (n = 70) | Age | Unstimulated Saliva Flow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significance of Sample (p-Value) |
Younger Adults (n = 38) |
Older Adults (n = 32) |
Low Saliva Flow (n = 23) |
Medium Saliva Flow (n = 23) |
High Saliva Flow (n = 24) |
||
| Hungry | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | −10.8 ± 3.7 | 1.00 | −14.4 ± 5.3 | −7.1 ± 4.5 | 13.0 ± 5.5 | 7.1 ± 5.2 | 12.2 ± 5.7 |
| Protein Cupcake | −13.1 ± 3.7 | −9.5 ± 5.2 | −16.8 ± 4.5 | 10.4 ± 5.4 | 15.0 ± 5.2 | 14.0 ± 5.7 | |
| Thirsty | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | 9.4 ± 4.0 | 0.04 | 15.1 ± 5.8 | 3.6 ± 4.8 | 6.3 ± 6.0 aA | 15.1 ± 5.6 b | 6.6 ± 6.1 a |
| Protein Cupcake | 15.5 ± 4.0 | 16.1 ± 5.7 | 15.0 ± 4.8 | 18.2 ± 5.9 B | 11.9 ± 5.5 | 16.4 ± 6.1 | |
| Desire to Eat | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | −14.9 ± 3.7 | 0.10 | −20.8 ± 5.2 aA | −9.0 ± 4.4 | 12.0 ± 5.5 | 9.5 ± 5.1 | 23.2 ± 5.6 |
| Protein Cupcake | −19.0 ± 3.7 | −20.7 ± 5.2 aA | −17.4 ± 4.4 | 20.8 ± 5.3 | 18.2 ± 5.1 | 18.2 ± 5.6 | |
| Satiety | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | 6.7 ± 4.1 | 0.27 | 7.5 ± 5.9 aA | 6.0 ± 4.9 | 1.7 ± 6.1 | 4.0 ± 5.7 | 14.6 ± 6.2 |
| Protein Cupcake | 7.5 ± 4.0 | 3.6 ± 5.8 aA | 11.4 ± 4.9 | 10.2 ± 6.0 a | 3.5 ± 5.6 b | 8.8 ± 6.2 a | |
| Fullness | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | 9.8 ± 3.9 | 0.48 | 13.9 ± 5.6 | 5.7 ± 4.7 | 5.0 ± 5.9 A | 12.5 ± 5.6 | 12.0 ± 6.0 |
| Protein Cupcake | 8.0 ± 3.9 | 6.2 ± 5.5 | 9.8 ± 4.7 | 9.6 ± 5.8 aB | 1.4 ± 5.5 b | 13.1 ± 6.0 a | |
| Prospective Consumption | |||||||
| Control Cupcake | −4.2 ± 3.3 | 0.45 | −4.9 ± 4.8 | −3.6 ± 4.0 | −2.2 ± 5.0 a | 7.0 ± 4.7 b | 7.9 ± 5.0 a |
| Protein Cupcake | −5.8 ± 3.3 | −0.4 ± 4.7 a | −11.0 ± 4.0 b | −3.7 ± 4.9 | 9.2 ± 4.7 | 11.7 ± 5.1 | |
Values are expressed as LSM estimates ± standard error from SAS output. Significant differences (p < 0.05) within a row (i.e., age YA vs. OA and saliva flow pairwise comparisons) are denoted by differing small letters, and within a column (i.e., within an age group between samples or within saliva flow groupings between samples) are denoted by differing capital letters. Appetite ratings were measured on a VAS (0–100 mm) and reflect a change from baseline (positive/negative values relate to the specific appetite rating being measured, for example, a negative hunger rating represents a decline in hunger). Individual saliva flow groupings are derived from unstimulated saliva flow only, through tertile analysis.